He isn't refuting someone else's game experience, he is refuting how people perceive the numbers. This isn't an intellectual argument, standing by a mathematical absolute is not intellectual, it is a constant, it is there, it wont change. The calculations done for the EB frequency will not change unless Blizzard changes the equations and formulas; The clause he makes is actually very broad, it applies to (i think he listed them) about 6 different encounters heavily. It is a qualitative observation based on experience. Now if he was to point you to the logs, (which isn't actually too difficult to look up yourself, you have his armory, and thus his WoL through a quick minute search) you would scurry around trying to quantify a very player specific, encounter-specific, environment-specific variable.

Originally Posted by Zonex

Taking things with a pinch of salt doesn't only apply to the "maths", it heavily applies to all the experiences and tips being thrown around, as it is subjective in most cases. If you are going to nit-pick at it, you are free to look up his logs for those occurrences, which is by no means fun.. for anyone. Again.. take it with a pinch of salt..

Considering that this is a 2h vs dw argument, I'd imagine that picking through his logs would prove futile, unless he did this experiment quite recently on the exact same encounter. Regardless, it is he who has the dissenting opinion, it is he who should put forth the effort to prove its truthfulness. I couldn't care less either way. If he's right, I'll make a note of it. If he isn't, then I won't. Either path works fine by me in terms of keeping brewmaster information up to date.

And it is an intellectual argument. We're discussing whether or not this math is accurate. Gyn is saying it is not. Chuupag is saying it is. Chuupag has been kind enough to show some math. Gyn has not. His entire argument has been that reality does not align to theory.

Originally Posted by Zonex

Being 15/16H and "not being done with HoF" does hold a merit when it comes to talking about experience. I see you've done 4 HCs, you know very well that you learn much more about an encounter when doing it on Heroic than when you do it on normal (even the retained normal mechanics).

Yes and no. At least for the fights I've done, mostly it's just less room for error. The timing of abilities has largely remained very similar to normal (with the principle exception of Gara'jal, whom I required cooldown rotations on in Heroic, when I could just do whatever in normal). That aside I haven't really noticed this as being too huge an issue, even when I was using a 2h weapon. The majority of the time I had stacks when I needed them. I never really noticed them fall off prior to them being vitally important.

Originally Posted by Zonex

He isn't proving anything wrong, he's not trying to say the math is wrong, because assuming the numbers have been punched in properly, they shouldn't be, he is saying that the conclusion you draw from it is shortsighted. (I'm putting words in his mouth now.. so I'm going to stop) Pointing at his experience, yes to some degree is disrespectful to players who don't have experience, but that's just the way it works; I am much more inclined to take the word of a long time proffessor without any validation than I am to take of an intern.. Experience has value

He's saying that the math is not in fact in proper relation with reality, or in layman's terms... that it's wrong.

Originally Posted by gynshon

Again with the math. We are telling you that the math is great and all, but real game experience tells us otherwise.

And while that is true, it doesn't mean you should take his word without an iota of proof other than "I say so". If your history professor said that information came to light that the assassination of Julius Caesar happened three years after other historians say it did and gave no evidence to such, other than his word, would you believe him, or would you be rather skeptical? Dissenting opinions are important to the progression of knowledge, but they must be dissected and looked over to ensure that they are in fact true.

Actually Gynshen never said the math was inaccurate, as far as I've seen, the bulk of his comments come down to the fact that those "once in a week" situations come up more than "the math says it should" (WHICH means, more than anything, the numbers give people a false sense of frequency, which does not correlate to the reality). Now, so you can't pick apart this sentence, I'll spell it out, so my subtext (if any) is clear; 1 occurence every 73 mins is quite hard to picture in such a fast paced game, esp. a BrM, the longest fights span about 15mins, 73 mins is kind of out of reach. As i mentioned before, people cling on to the bad stuff, because they just stick out more.

If the argument is about him saying "this happens more than the math says it should", well it doesn't take a genius to realize the idiomacy in the comment.

Novice BrM's come here to get advice, and advice from experience trumps the Math predictions at this point, otherwise we'd all be doing it.. right? People take DW because of the DPS, the consistency and the reliability (assuming same ILVL). These are important things to have as a novice BrM, especially when RNG is having a field day with you, and retaining some degree of control is better than none.

2H has its place, but tbh, its not there for BrM's who have a choice. Averaged out numbers are beautiful statistics, but reality is chaotic and consistency is king.

Also yea, you cycling cooldowns for Gara'jal is essential for HC mode, but it doesn't mean it wont make you better for normal mode. If that same advice is passed down to a struggling raider doing garajal 10N.. his supremacy thanks to the advice, can give the rest of the raid more of a fallback if players screw up somehow. Also, the magnitude of difficulty from MSV HCs and HoF/TOES HC's is significant as a tank, that cooldown cycling has got to become second hand to use by the time we are solo tanking Windlord HC . For Empress HC, for tayak's strike with like 5 stacks of intensify, oo and a personal favourite with Zorlok, gotta love eating "sonic barrier"-less force and verves with Avert harm up -> Dip super low after the first 3 ticks, and then ZM to glory (ZM falls off 1 or 2 ticks before it ends but still should be enough to get topped )

In terms of DW vs 2h, things where it would matter, is again Empress P2, sometimes you get lucky with about 10 stacks built after EB already used, sometimes you end up with 2 stacks, it really makes the healers scratch their heads, as they can't get used to the spiky damage intake try to try. There is also Sha of fear, which was discussed a few pages back, not too big a deal on Normal, since it wont kill you (will get you super low though), having Eb up for that insanely increases the chance to not get instagibbed by an exponential factor of 3. You also have Garalon, which is quite similar to Sha of Fear. You also have WotE, that bastard hits so hard that, if you get unlucky and get almost no stacks after a dance, you are in for a world of pain, esp. if it's on HC or it's a gas phase, even with FB up, ir hurts >.> On the flip side, DW doesn't have any disadvantages to it other than a 1% long term decrease in EB generation. Consistency even when you dont need it is helpful.

Actually Gynshen never said the math was inaccurate, as far as I've seen, the bulk of his comments come down to the fact that those "once in a week" situations come up more than "the math says it should" (WHICH means, more than anything, the numbers give people a false sense of frequency, which does not correlate to the reality).

In other words, the math is wrong, or incomplete, since the math is supposed to roughly model what you're supposed to expect in-game. If what is happening in-game does not roughly fit the pattern that the mathematically-derived model provides, then the math is wrong.

Originally Posted by Zonex

Now, so you can't pick apart this sentence, I'll spell it out, so my subtext (if any) is clear; 1 occurence every 73 mins is quite hard to picture in such a fast paced game, esp. a BrM, the longest fights span about 15mins, 73 mins is kind of out of reach. As i mentioned before, people cling on to the bad stuff, because they just stick out more.

It's pretty easy to picture, at least to me. Once every 73 minutes on a fight that lasts 15 minutes is roughly once every 5 attempts. I'm not sure your point with this, unless you want to tell me that in terms of progression the missing of this one is going to be an absolute wipe (which also assumes that the brewmaster has no fallback plan (external CD's, possibly) and that this happens at the worst time, instead of during a period where it wouldn't have mattered much).

Originally Posted by Zonex

Novice BrM's come here to get advice, and advice from experience trumps the Math predictions at this point, otherwise we'd all be doing it.. right? People take DW because of the DPS, the consistency and the reliability (assuming same ILVL). These are important things to have as a novice BrM, especially when RNG is having a field day with you, and retaining some degree of control is better than none.

I wouldn't say reliability, since that assumes one side (which again has yet to show any mathematical evidence to such) is correct, though DPS and consistency are certainly attributes that have been proven to be true simply by observing the nature of how it produces EB charges (less but more frequently).

Originally Posted by Zonex

2H has its place, but tbh, its not there for BrM's who have a choice. Averaged out numbers are beautiful statistics, but reality is chaotic and consistency is king.

If the averaged out numbers are fairly equal, then there shouldn't be enough of a difference in time between sufficient amounts of stacks for legitimizing the use of the CD to where one is superior to the point where the other would never be viable, which appears to be what you're suggesting.

Well an adjoining sentence to explain wasn't enough, here i'll put it in other words and in simple terms for you, and in bold and underlined too .

The math paints a scenario of no errors, algebraic math cannot begin to describe this multivariable monstrosity that is raiding; at best the equations given work for specific given situations.

The mathematical models paint an error-less picture for flawless gameplay. People don't play flawlessly, so the models are used as gentle guides, whilst experience is genuine feedback.

I'll put something a wise man once said. When choosing to do something questionable, imagine if the entire world was to adopt that same philosophy. Now imagine you have a chance to screw up every 73mins, assuming perfect play. Now imagine 24 other people screwing up every 73 mins, and the consequence having the possibility of causing a lot of strain on the raid, or a wipe. Doesn't seem so minute anymore..

It's great you can imagine yourself screwing up every 73 minutes, now imagine 25 screwing up 25 times every 73 mins, have fun with that

So being consistent isn't reliable? Having a more concrete number of Eb to expect after a certain period of time isn't reliable? Are you sure you aren't mixing up words here? Reliability is more than anything a qualitative term, bring in "logs and numbers" won't advocate your case.

That is just the thing, averaging out numbers works great on models, but is to be taken with a dose of reality when applying to the game.

And here you are putting words in my mouth again (got a real knack, kudos ^^), I never said 2h would never be viable, i said it is simply worse than having DW, qualitaitvely speaking (oh and if youre going to paraphrase that as well, i believe the word is suboptimal), the thing with BrMs is that almost anything is viable, but optimality changes from player to player. If one would have the choice between consistency, higher dps, and steadier EB, or a 1% increase in EB, however a much erratic pattern, the choice would be the prior.

You have already stated that you like to be a "devil's advocate" and have a love for debating and arguing, so this makes sense, but don't derail your own statements made way at the beginning of the thread, it undermines your own word.

As I've said... while experience is nice, it is by NO means proof enough. If Gynshon wants his word to be taken seriously, he has to back it up with facts. Essentially saying "I'm 15/16 H, you're not even done with Normal HoF. 'Nuff said" is in fact NOT enough said. There is absolutely no defense for that in an intellectual argument. His advice is useful, certainly, but if he wants to prove someone wrong, he can't just point at his experience and his anecdotal evidence. He needs to show some contrasting numbers.

No Madgod, that's not how the real life works. I dunno what's your professional level / grade, but it's not by chance that experienced ones are your "n+1".
In a situation, you'll find by your mathematics that "A better than B". Would you still say that to Mr.X, 10 years experiments if it tells you to do B because it's better for many reasons you don't see because of your weak experiments ? If yes, there is a reason why you're still beginner (I'm not telling you you are of course, just in a case of situation). Learning from other experiments is a part of Neuro-Linguistic Programming tool to improve many things.

Many of you would be under my technical lead in a computing environement, and yet I would'nt argue with numbers (but fact yes, you are right. I would explain a situation where it happens / the causes and, more importantly the CONSEQUENCES (risks) when telling you to do B instead of A.

This is how you do a risk analysis, and belive me, if result is higher with A just because of "Risk" value, you'll do B whatever math tell you.
In a raid context, suppose many tries, where people are tired ... the last try, everyone do right, they play well ! And ... the "probability to happen" comes true this try... "ho shit, with (for example) mastery / stam I would have survived". Mates will "hate" you, for sure (gently).

There is a reason why many BrM from top guild are wearing mastery / stamina. As far as I'm concerned, on Empress for example, I'm starting the adds with FB and not EB at 9 stacks at most (even both !), because it's a "reliable" source of controling input damage where the input CAN be deadly. That is experiment, not maths. I died once (first try), I decided then to be more "reliable" to my mates => stam / all reducing damage CD first, then probability CD (what you do if you don't avoid all hits from 4 adds ? he, you hit the floor even with EB up ... !) and stays stationary to do more DPS (which make you stay alive longer in fact). Not had to wear mastery yet, but stam HOOO YESS.

Just please consider what Gynshon and other are telling you. Numbers act as an "intellectual proof" for sure, but experiment sometimes more, that is how real life is.

One side is claiming that even though maths is good, in game RNG can and has favoured bad scenarios.
The other side is saying that these bad strings of luck should on average only occur once every 73 mins or once in 5 attempts on a 15 min fight.

The problem with the first one is you're always presuming that the RNG string comes at the worst time, saying that if you don't get them, it's a wipe. I've read many threads which have claimed the "If you miss X it's a wipe cause it CAN occur on Y" Isn't it just as likely that X happens during a time where it doesn't matter like when you're at 15 stacks of EB waiting for that timing window to use it.

Each fight will have a bad timing window, some will be a hell of a lot worse then others. This is something that as a player who is tanking HM progression should understand and be able to play around with.

But yes, i do agree, take things with a grain of salt, math is good. It shows you the raw numbers, lots of people enjoy them. But experience to know when to use them to your advantage is better.

I think everyone agrees that dw>2h if you have similar ilvl weapons mainly because the EB stacks come at a more frequent rate and most of the time 1-2 stacks is enough to avoid the hard hitting attacks (thrash for example) you're using it against.

On the other hand if you're dying due to not having EB stacks or them falling off you're doing it wrong. You should be able to work around it pretty easy, imo.

I can't say I recall my EB stacks dropping off many times at all this whole tier, if you're experiencing this you probably have a lower melee uptime and should be swinging more!
The only time it was a 'problem' was on sha hc in p2 when he had dread thrash up and submerged (or just waited like 5-7sec before melee swinging, for some reason he does this sometime when he hasn't applied the armor debuff) and even then it was no major issue tbh.

Also I just wanna put it out there that the math is great and all but in the end, if something feels better and works for you as a player you should be rolling with that instead. Math is good but it can never make up for experience, even more so with all the mechanics that are included in encounters and the fact that you're not standing still tanking from pull to kill.

So being consistent isn't reliable? Having a more concrete number of Eb to expect after a certain period of time isn't reliable? Are you sure you aren't mixing up words here? Reliability is more than anything a qualitative term, bring in "logs and numbers" won't advocate your case.

That is just the thing, averaging out numbers works great on models, but is to be taken with a dose of reality when applying to the game.

And here you are putting words in my mouth again (got a real knack, kudos ^^), I never said 2h would never be viable, i said it is simply worse than having DW, qualitaitvely speaking (oh and if youre going to paraphrase that as well, i believe the word is suboptimal), the thing with BrMs is that almost anything is viable, but optimality changes from player to player. If one would have the choice between consistency, higher dps, and steadier EB, or a 1% increase in EB, however a much erratic pattern, the choice would be the prior.

Reliability is based on math, math is quantitative.

Reliability by deﬁnition, is the probability of performing without failure, a speciﬁc function under given conditions for a speciﬁed period of time.

My post seems to have been skipped...

So basically, the amount of elusive brew procs you get in 60 seconds is the same, regardless of dual wield or 2h, the only differentiating factor is crit chance.
Crit chance is the only thing which will effect your procs or not. In theory, you can roll more die (plural for dice) and get a better average or more consistency (dual wield), however this could also backfire, if you don't get your crits it could be a lot worse than 2h in theory.

Thus 45 on all cases, assuming that crits are being good. Now if you want to talk about crit in nature, that's something else.

I can't say I've done every heroic this raid tier yet but, from my experience it really doesn't matter which you have, as there's enough time to build stacks regardless.

Gara'jal (heroic) - his shadow attack is every 6 seconds. CD is 9 seconds.
Will of the Emperor (heroic) - You have a dance period, assuming the swings take 3 seconds each, that's 30 seconds of build up time. I haven't yet failed to get 15 stacks with my 2h wep.
Empress (normal at least) - You have to dual tank her anyway - so you have some build up time.
Sha (normal, though doubt it matters) - His thrash is every 8-13 seconds (it can be delayed by his other casts).

1H: [1.5*WeaponSpeed/2.6]
In words:
If your auto-attacks crit, you get either 1 or 2 stacks of elusive brew, which alternate keeping an average of 1.5, assuming your weapon speed is 2.6.
2H: [3.0*WeaponSpeed/3.6]
In words:
If your auto-attacks crit, you get 3 stacks of elusive brew, assuming your weapon speed is 3.6.
If your auto-attacks crit, WITH 3.3 WEAPON SPEED you get 3 stacks of elusive brew 3/4 of the time, the other 1/4 is 2 stacks.

Therefore, the chance of getting an elusive brew proc is the same.
The exception with this comes to if you want to look at crit and the attack table. Dual wield would require more expertise to get through the higher parry rate (that the second 1h weapon would bring). However, this isn't until you have enough crit to fully overtake your hit chance. (Crit would eat into hit first, then conflict with parry chance).

Basically, the only difference is that dual wield 1h means that you get a slightly steadier stream.

Originally Posted by Chuupag

X=haste in the form 1.XX

You did not put haste in that form. That is why your numbers came up wrong. You are making things more complicated by simplifying...that's quite a feat.

I condensed steps in making those equations to make them easier to read. The full formulas are:

Suffice to say skipping steps and condensing made those formulas easier to read. The formula I provided gives you the expected number of charges of EB given the variables you input.

Originally Posted by Yohassakura

So basically, the amount of elusive brew procs you get in 60 seconds is the same, regardless of dual wield or 2h, the only differentiating factor is crit chance.

You are not taking into account haste or raid buffs in your calculations. My math has shown that the charges are not exactly the same, but are within 1% of each other, so as to not really make that much of a difference in gearing decisions.

Well an adjoining sentence to explain wasn't enough, here i'll put it in other words and in simple terms for you, and in bold and underlined too .

The math paints a scenario of no errors, algebraic math cannot begin to describe this multivariable monstrosity that is raiding; at best the equations given work for specific given situations.

The mathematical models paint an error-less picture for flawless gameplay. People don't play flawlessly, so the models are used as gentle guides, whilst experience is genuine feedback.

I'd appreciate it if you truly wish to continue this that you would refrain from being patronizing. Everything you have just said I have essentially covered in my responses to you. It still doesn't change the facts surrounding them.

Originally Posted by Zonex

I'll put something a wise man once said. When choosing to do something questionable, imagine if the entire world was to adopt that same philosophy. Now imagine you have a chance to screw up every 73mins, assuming perfect play. Now imagine 24 other people screwing up every 73 mins, and the consequence having the possibility of causing a lot of strain on the raid, or a wipe. Doesn't seem so minute anymore..

It's great you can imagine yourself screwing up every 73 minutes, now imagine 25 screwing up 25 times every 73 mins

I read somewhere that bleeding edge guilds sometimes make decisions, especially tanks, where they KNOW that they are going to die due to RNG, but it provides them the most benefit in the long run... Unfortunately, I cannot accurately cite that, so feel free to doubt. Regardless, that's not what's happening and even if it was, (you point this out yourself), it has the possibility of straining or wiping the raid. This is almost exactly the same as people's inane worries about getting three chi-generating abilities parried in a row. I remember in that thread people were almost frantic about it. It's not necessarily the end of the world if RNG doesn't play nice. In reality, a little more than once an hour for a chance is pretty good. It's cause for concern, surely, as you need to be prepared, but that's what raiding's about nowadays.

Originally Posted by Zonex

So being consistent isn't reliable? Having a more concrete number of Eb to expect after a certain period of time isn't reliable? Are you sure you aren't mixing up words here? Reliability is more than anything a qualitative term, bring in "logs and numbers" won't advocate your case.

I would say consistency is different from reliability in terms of getting you out of a jam and allowing you to be a bit more dangerous with your stacks (like holding on to them). They're interrelated, but I wouldn't say they're the same thing, and I wouldn't say that one [type of weapon] is pointedly superior than the other as of yet.

Originally Posted by Zonex

That is just the thing, averaging out numbers works great on models, but is to be taken with a dose of reality when applying to the game.

Exactly what I said. Doesn't mean that they won't (or shouldn't) be relatively accurate.

Originally Posted by Zonex

I never said 2h would never be viable, i said it is simply worse than having DW, qualitaitvely speaking, the thing with BrMs is that almost anything is viable, but optimality changes from player to player. If one would have the choice between consistency, higher dps, and steadier EB, or a 1% increase in EB, however a much erratic pattern, the choice would be the prior.

While that is true this tier it is also because of the stats on the weapons. What this debate is about is figuring out if it is intrinsic to the weapon type and by how great a margin.

For one thing, the choice would be between higher DPS, steadier EB (stating consistency and then that you have a steadier EB generation is basically just repeating yourself), and more erratic stats versus more stable stats, more erratic EB, and less DPS. We're simply discussing Elusive Brew. We've failed to discuss the stats on the weapons. Though it's not really a point this tier, as the claw of Shek'Zeer is best in slot, it is something to consider when making statements like dw > 2h.

In Wrath, I played a bear. Everyone swore bears were easy because they had 3 buttons and everyone swore warriors were tougher because they had a swiss army knife worth of tools at their disposal.

I always disagreed with that.

See, bears back then were extremely easy...when everything was going perfectly. My issue was that things rarely went perfectly. When a ranged dps or healer pulled threat it was more difficult to get it back because bears had virtually no tools. When there was more than one caster we were practically helpless we had no silence, no interrupt, no real ranged attack to get their attention with. I thought it was brutally hard to tank on a bear during the actual gameplay and away from theorycrafting and the boards.

I kind of feel like that is similar to the argument going on now.

The optimal numbers show us what we could be doing if we and our raid are playing perfectly, but considering perfect play is rare, should we be looking more at ways to solve problems that will arise, instead of numbers for perfect output?

You did not put haste in that form. That is why your numbers came up wrong. You are making things more complicated by simplifying...that's quite a feat.

C(T/(W/(Z*Y*X)))*E*Q

You are not taking into account haste or raid buffs in your calculations. My math has shown that the charges are not exactly the same, but are within 1% of each other, so as to not really make that much of a difference in gearing decisions.

By making it simpler, you made it look wrong.

I realize that I didn't include haste into the calculations, though I guess I was trying to state that there would be no difference between them in the purest form, although there's the 40% haste buff from wielding a 2h.

This makes BOTH 2h = 21.56 and dual wield = 21.32307

According to your formula, all of your numbers are slightly off, but I don't know why your 2H values differed. I realized you probably rounded 1 or 2 numbers...

I bet that if you raised your DPS by 1% by using dual wield alone, your DPS would outweigh the 3 seconds extra dodge you'd get every 5mins.

1H: [1.5*WeaponSpeed/2.6]
In words:
If your auto-attacks crit, you get either 1 or 2 stacks of elusive brew, which alternate keeping an average of 1.5, assuming your weapon speed is 2.6.
2H: [3.0*WeaponSpeed/3.6]
In words:
If your auto-attacks crit, you get 3 stacks of elusive brew, assuming your weapon speed is 3.6.
If your auto-attacks crit, WITH 3.3 WEAPON SPEED you get 3 stacks of elusive brew 3/4 of the time, the other 1/4 is 2 stacks.

Therefore, the chance of getting an elusive brew proc is the same.

You are not actually proving anything here despite what you said at the bottom. You are just stating the number of procs you get based on weapon speed.

Originally Posted by Yohassakura

So basically, the amount of elusive brew procs you get in 60 seconds is the same, regardless of dual wield or 2h, the only differentiating factor is crit chance.
Crit chance is the only thing which will effect your procs or not. In theory, you can roll more die (plural for dice) and get a better average or more consistency (dual wield), however this could also backfire, if you don't get your crits it could be a lot worse than 2h in theory.

Thus 45 on all cases, assuming that crits are being good. Now if you want to talk about crit in nature, that's something else.

Your calculations here aren't actually showing number of charges. You are multiplying proc number by crit chance by seconds to create a completely useless number. Nowhere in here do you take into account weapon speed, which is the important number you need.

Originally Posted by Yohassakura

By making it simpler, you made it look wrong.

I realize that I didn't include haste into the calculations, though I guess I was trying to state that there would be no difference between them in the purest form, although there's the 40% haste buff from wielding a 2h.

This makes BOTH 2h = 21.56 and dual wield = 21.32307

I find it funny that making it simpler I've made it 'look wrong' when your math doesn't have anything to do with anything...at all. I have no idea where you are getting that both 2H would be the same number of charges. 3.3 wep speed and 3.6 wep speed give different numbers of charges. 2.75 on average for 3.3 and 3 for 3.6. If you have the same amount of haste you would get more auto-attacks with the 3.3 wep speed and the math says you would get ever so slightly more EB with the 3.3 than the 3.6 even with the less charges on average, but that difference is only .3%.

---------- Post added 2012-12-26 at 06:26 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Yohassakura

According to your formula, all of your numbers are slightly off, but I don't know why your 2H values differed. I realized you probably rounded 1 or 2 numbers...

I bet that if you raised your DPS by 1% by using dual wield alone, your DPS would outweigh the 3 seconds extra dodge you'd get every 5mins.

When I'm doing theorycrafting math I round to 2 decimals b/c that is what blizz does. And I have no idea how you would compare 1% dps to 3 seconds extra EB, or why you would want to. I also don't know where you get 3 seconds from...because the difference over 5 minutes is only 1 second between DW and 2H

I think alot of this discussion can be nipped in the butt by reminding people that the stacks falling off once every 73 minutes is only if you are not using EB on cooldown, or at least every 15-20 seconds, which I don't think happens very often at all.

This is almost exactly the same as people's inane worries about getting three chi-generating abilities parried in a row. I remember in that thread people were almost frantic about it. It's not necessarily the end of the world if RNG doesn't play nice. In reality, a little more than once an hour for a chance is pretty good. It's cause for concern, surely, as you need to be prepared, but that's what raiding's about nowadays.

That's pretty much what this discussion about EB has become, except I can't say that Gen's concerns are inane (not saying that's what you're doing Madgod). The concern expressed by him is similar to the parry issue. For him, it appears worth it to use DW for more reliable/steady EB generation (at least that's what he appears to be getting at). Some may agree some may disagree, much like the expertise cap to avoid KS parries. It's annoying when it happens, but how important it is for you to avoid that situation and the perceived costs/benefits are going to vary.

I agree w/ Zonex on the topic of experience, and Gen on the issue of having less stacks of EB than he should/or wanted to have with a 2h. I use a 2h and there are definitely times where I stack EB rather quickly and other times when I stack EB rather slowly. Gen's experience gives him increased credibility, that's just the nature of him being successful.

It's rather difficult and time consuming to be skeptical of every dissenting opinion regarding wow theorycrafting. I'm in a guild that raids 2x a week, for a total of 6 hours per week. I don't have the time to dissect and evaluate every opinion about BrM theorycrafting that's out there. So with that in mind, I shamelessly and sometimes mindlessly follow the opinions of players who are on the cutting edge of progression, unless it's so obviously wrong or totally against common sense.

I find it funny that making it simpler I've made it 'look wrong' when your math doesn't have anything to do with anything...at all. I have no idea where you are getting that both 2H would be the same number of charges. 3.3 wep speed and 3.6 wep speed give different numbers of charges. 2.75 on average for 3.3 and 3 for 3.6. If you have the same amount of haste you would get more auto-attacks with the 3.3 wep speed and the math says you would get ever so slightly more EB with the 3.3 than the 3.6 even with the less charges on average, but that difference is only .3%.

And that's why I hate it when blizzard rounds numbers, even when trying to average numbers out.

If you were to put the calculation for 3.3 and 3.6 2h weapons into a calculator or spreadsheet, it would come out to be the same answer (21.56).
I said it looked wrong because I compared the values of 3.3 and 3.6 in my head (3.6/3.3 and 3/2.75 = 0.10909...), and they were exactly the same, just as what a calculator would say, as it doesn't round to 2dp.

What I was trying to show earlier, is that without the application of haste, (and an always accurate crit model), that you would get the same amount of elusive brew stacks.

If you go the haste route, 2H is slightly better, whereas if you go to the crit route, it just helps to increase the heavy side of 2H, which people see as a bad thing, so they go for consistency of dual wield but still try to increase their chance with crit.

That said, crit outweighs haste as it affects the the value of the sum, greater than what haste does. If we ignore the "blizzard only uses 2dp" rule for a moment, with a 3.3 speed weapon, changing increasing the haste value from 12% to 17% increases the value to 22.52 but increasing crit from 25% to 30% increases it to 25.872. So crit would still far outweigh haste in either situations, just talking about elusive brew stacks (by 4.5x approximately).

Then if you compare haste values to crit values in their actual % given per point ( as these are different ), this would bring the 4.5 down to approximately 3.2x

Basically, the weapon doesn't really matter, but what does effect elusive brew is getting more crit.

That said, if Dancing steel procs twice as much with dual wield compared to 2H, then clearly dual wield far surpasses 2h due to the extra agi. Dancing steel gives you approximately 1.4% crit per proc for 12 seconds.

If you were to put the calculation for 3.3 and 3.6 2h weapons into a calculator or spreadsheet, it would come out to be the same answer (21.56).
I said it looked wrong because I compared the values of 3.3 and 3.6 in my head (3.6/3.3 and 3/2.75 = 0.10909...), and they were exactly the same, just as what a calculator would say, as it doesn't round to 2dp.

No. 3.3 and 3.6 are different numbers so they are affected differently by the entire rest of the equation. Haste is multiplicative, not additive, so they diverge more than just taking the relative ratios. It has nothing to do with me or blizzard averaging to any specific number.

Originally Posted by Yohassakura

What I was trying to show earlier, is that without the application of haste, (and an always accurate crit model), that you would get the same amount of elusive brew stacks.

Wrong again, because haste is multiplicative and the 40% melee haste from using a 2H throws that notion out the window.

Originally Posted by Yohassakura

If you go the haste route, 2H is slightly better, whereas if you go to the crit route, it just helps to increase the heavy side of 2H, which people see as a bad thing, so they go for consistency of dual wield but still try to increase their chance with crit.

I don't even have a clue what you mean by 'the heavy side of 2H.' Haste is about 33% as effective as crit at generating EB. This math has been shown long ago and is not in question. Haste benefits a 2H ever so slightly more, but the contribution is so small as to be meaningless to argue.

Originally Posted by Yohassakura

That said, crit outweighs haste as it affects the the value of the sum, greater than what haste does. If we ignore the "blizzard only uses 2dp" rule for a moment, with a 3.3 speed weapon, changing increasing the haste value from 12% to 17% increases the value to 22.52 but increasing crit from 25% to 30% increases it to 25.872. So crit would still far outweigh haste in either situations, just talking about elusive brew stacks (by 4.5x approximately).

You can't just ignore mechanics that don't agree with how you want to show the math. And again crit's and haste's relative values at EB have long been known.

Originally Posted by Yohassakura

Then if you compare haste values to crit values in their actual % given per point ( as these are different ), this would bring the 4.5 down to approximately 3.2x

This has already been taken into account in the 33% number above.

Originally Posted by Yohassakura

Basically, the weapon doesn't really matter, but what does effect elusive brew is getting more crit.

Finally something we agree on, mostly. Haste is still good for EB since you are going to have it anyways.

Originally Posted by Yohassakura

That said, if Dancing steel procs twice as much with dual wield compared to 2H, then clearly dual wield far surpasses 2h due to the extra agi. Dancing steel gives you approximately 1.4% crit per proc for 12 seconds.

2H predominately have more stats than DW. This tier is a bit wonky with sha gems throwing off 'normal' numbers. 1.4% crit over 12 seconds is pretty much garbage though, seeing as you will only get 5 white attacks in that time using a 2H. This was also already discussed a few pages back with regards to trinket procs. Of all the bad choices agil proc is the best, but it's still not spectacular for BrM.

I've just started trying to learn Brewmaster tanking and I've noticed something about my HP compared to other tanks from other classes. It's low. Like really low. Like, with raid buff and food I'm still way under 500k but I've seen other tanks scraping 600k against Sha of Anger. Paladins specifically confuse me because their passive only adds 5% more stamina than ours and yet I've seen one at 551k HP.

Should my HP be this low?

Soothing Mist:"Healing them for a minor amount every 0.5 sec, until you take any other action."Jade Serpent Statue: "The statue will also begin casting Soothing Mist on your target. healing for 50% as much as yours. " [What's half of minor?]
"Statue casts Soothing Mist at a nearby ally for toddler healing."

While I'm really enjoying Monk tanking, I can always look back over at my Blood DK and say "she can periodically have her entire HP as a shield when offtanking, doesn't take a CD to turn it on, doesn't have a CD on it, has decent static dodge and parry, and far more HP than a Monk." It feels a bit scary to look at magic damage incoming and knowing that another tank with less ilvl than me has as much as 100k more health to survive it than I do with similar cooldowns.

Soothing Mist:"Healing them for a minor amount every 0.5 sec, until you take any other action."Jade Serpent Statue: "The statue will also begin casting Soothing Mist on your target. healing for 50% as much as yours. " [What's half of minor?]
"Statue casts Soothing Mist at a nearby ally for toddler healing."